Perception is reality

December 17 2007

Earlier today, I had some time to review some interesting regional market research.  I'm not sure if or how much of this can be shared publicly, but I'm going to try anyway.  

This research talked to a decent number of Microsoft customers, and was conducted last quarter.  Among the many questions asked of these Microsoft customers was,

What are the main weaknesses of the Microsoft brand and its products?
Survey participants were not given a list of potential answers....their unprompted responses were categorized by the researcher.

I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw the answers on this (and at the time, I was sitting on the upper level of a commuter train, that would not have been fun).  The most popular answer was "high cost".  Others were around performance or compatibility.  But the one that stood out was the 25% (second-most popular answer) who said .... "none".

Let's repeat that.  One in four respondents to this survey indicated that there are no main weaknesses of the Microsoft brand and its products.

That is some pretty impressive kool-aid.

Ed Brill | Highland Park, IL USA Category:  Microsoft  Add/View Comments [70]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Chris Pepin http://www.chrispepin.com | 12/17/2007 5:07:28 PM

    My guess is that you'd get similar results if you asked IBM/Lotus customers of main weakness of IBM/Lotus brand and its products

  1. 2  Bill Geimer  | 12/17/2007 5:21:22 PM

    I am not so sure about that. I think it pretty much depends on whom you ask. If I were an IBM customer, I might mention that when I change ids in Notes 8, embedded sametime logs me out when I switch out, and then wants to be set up again when I switch back. But if I were a Microsoft customer, I would say that there is no security in Outlook 2007 on a local data store, and anybody who happens by my pc can launch Outlook, read and delete my existing mail, and reply or write a new message that will be sent when I next connect to my exchange server, or perhaps will mention that the Out of Office agent is a blank rule box that still has no provision to not respond to internet addresses.

    Its just a matter of whom you ask. Some will be PC, some will not.

  1. 3  Darren http://www.dadams.co.uk | 12/17/2007 5:50:39 PM

    @2 - I agree, it depends on who you ask. End users won't care much or know about the lack of Exchange roadmap, the removal of active / active clustering, the problems with a corrupted message store (just that e-mail is down again), and the potential impact of the poor security.

  1. 4  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 12/17/2007 5:57:44 PM

    It's hard to know how to take this without some idea of who the participants were. CEO's will have a different set of priorities and experiences than CIO's, and they in turn will yield different results than middle management, who also have different expectations than business users.

  1. 5  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/17/2007 6:01:00 PM

    @4 IT decision makers in the area of collaborative software. About half SMB <1000 employees and half enterprise. No indication of the "rank" of the person responding.

  1. 6  Jim Casale  | 12/17/2007 8:09:10 PM

    @Ed My CIO says it is ALL about perception. It's his famous quote around the office. Some people have the perception that everyone else is using Exchange so it must be good. The major problem with that perception is reality. Not everyone is using Exchange. When you have analysts at Gartner saying how the migration could be done in one weekend...well how could it be perceived otherwise right? No need to check facts and assumptions when an analysts tells you that. So not only is Exchange the way to go...it's a piece of cake to migrate over.

    Perception is a very powerful tool and motivator. Management perceives that the "powers that be" think Exchange is the way to go, so for corporate political expediency the herd mentality sets in and no one will stand up and tell the Emperor that he/she has no clothes on.

  1. 7  Doug Bruce  | 12/17/2007 8:42:51 PM

    I've just interviewed for an SMB with around 1000 personnel based in the Houston area - nothing but Microsoft, even down to the financials and CRM systems.

    When i asked why they had 300 servers for those 1000 people, the response was simply "that's what's needed". They have 35 servers doing nothing but printing. At my last org, they had 1 for 550 people - but then, it was linux based.

    You can guess what the project is - virtualization, involving ......... Microsoft Virtual Server.

  1. 8  Gregg Eldred http://www.ns-tech.com/blog/geldred.nsf | 12/17/2007 8:57:59 PM

    Ed, I hate top beat a dead horse

    { Link }

    but doesn't this just confirm what you have been saying for a long time, and some people - not your readers, don't seem to understand? That is, many times, when you have competing products, it isn't the technological merits/roadmaps/etc., it is something else, that gets the win? I suppose that you can call it "perception."

    If you know how to change the "perception," I am all ears. :-)

  1. 9  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/17/2007 9:12:42 PM

    @6 Jim, did your boss at one time work in the insurance field? My first job out of college, my then-manager used this expression a LOT, too. We figured he learned it at his prior job, which was a Chicago-based insurance company.

  1. 10  Mick Moignard http://www.dominopower.com | 12/18/2007 1:58:25 AM

    You can look another way round too. 75%, 3 in 4, of the respondents say that there is at least one main weakness to the MS Product set.

    So why do people buy and keep something with what they later admit is a weakness? It must also be a weakness that affects their use of it, otherwise to them, it would not be a weakness.

  1. 11  Kerr  | 12/18/2007 3:34:51 AM

    @10, you really can't think of a weakness in Lotus' brand and products? Just because there is a weakness doesn't mean you don't think it's the best available solution.

  1. 12  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 3:51:35 AM

    Perhaps some of the 25% who indicated there are no weaknesses in the Microsoft brand and its products simply didn't want to criticise Microsoft to a competitor?

  1. 13  Stuart McIntyre http://collaborationmatters.com | 12/18/2007 4:26:12 AM

    Also, I think this highlights how poor telesurveys are at gathering accurate user feedback.

    The 25% who answered "None" may have just thought that this would get the researcher off the line fast than answering with something more truthful, thus unleashing another 10 questions on why they thought the points were weaknesses etc.

    I know I do that's what i do when my patience has been exhausted...

  1. 14  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 12/18/2007 5:55:56 AM

    @13 - It certainly shows how surveys are not a replacement for the market.

    "What are the main weaknesses of the Microsoft brand and its products?"

    "None."

    "Oh. So have you deployed Microsoft Vista?"

    "No."

    "Ah, then you have deployed Microsoft Office 2007?"

    "No."

    "So the two main flagship products for business computing, for which you pay an annual license, have not shipped an upgrade that you need in the last 5 years. But you see no weaknesses in this strategy?"

    "Uhhhhh.... look, I can't get fired for buying Microsoft. They take our CIO out for yacht cruises and rock concerts."

    *Maybe* if the survey were line workers or even white-collar workers outside of IT, that might make some sense. But who in the IT world wouldn't say "failure to ship" or "security vulnerabilities" when talking about Microsoft's weaknesses?

    It takes a certain kind of audience to refuse to question their premises to such a degree. If these are existing MS customers, and they don't recognize the threats that the vendor poses to their own success, what does that tell us?

  1. 15  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/18/2007 7:29:25 AM

    @12 / @ 13 - the same research organisation contacted the same number of Lotus customers in the same market -- not a single one of the Lotus customers answered "none" to the "weaknesses" question. Also, the researcher was not IBM/Lotus, though it was conducted for us. From looking at the panel of results, it seems unlikely that the MS customers would have hesitated on answering this particular one.

  1. 16  Karen Demerly  | 12/18/2007 8:19:42 AM

    So what is IBM/Lotus doing to change the perception of IBM/Lotus? I think that's been asked here before. It's obviously not always about price points, or ship dates, or whether the refresh button is F5 or F9.

    I think IBM ought to be throwing Lotus products off the parade float - giving it away, putting it in the hands of every youngster in the world. Our kids should grow up on IBM software. Then their perception will be changed, won't it?

  1. 17  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 8:49:41 AM

    @Ed - Yikes. I suppose I should have surmised you'd have covered the possibilities prior to your main post. I'm now struggling to find the right adjective to describe my feelings about this.

    Your response @5 now implies that 25% of IT decision makers in the area of collaborative software see no main weaknessess in Microsoft's collaboration products. I can only suggest that those same IT decision makers have wangled themselves into jobs about which they know absolutely nowt which doesn't help at all.

    Very puzzling.

  1. 18  Bill Brown  | 12/18/2007 9:05:42 AM

    @16 BINGO!!! And I'm in a position to see the retreat that IBM has made in the K12 market here in Western NY. There used to be a great, affordable program call Total Campus Option.

    Now we have the nightmare Scholars program.

  1. 19  Pedro Quaresma  | 12/18/2007 9:09:07 AM

    I think installing Windows security patches, rebooting Windows servers for updates and after every weekly Windows crash is probably so common in some companies that the IT personnel doesn't see low-security and downtime as weaknesses anymore.

    I wish IBM would push more for the usage of their tools on other OSs. Maybe when one of these customers calls support saying "Domino crashed again!", the IBM representative could eventually suggest "Windows hmmm? Ever tried running Domino on a more stable OS?"

  1. 20  Craig Wiseman http://www.wiseman.la/cpw | 12/18/2007 9:24:25 AM

    To this point, Microsoft simply has done an awesome (as in, deserving of awe) job of building a self-reinforcing ecosystem around itself and it's products. At every level, from partners to developers to IT managers.

    Their sales folks and partners come in to meetings on message and clear on how their products work and fit together.

    I do think we're beginning to see this crack, with the OpenXML debacle ({ Link } ) being an indicator.

    IBM aids and abets this and sends vastly, hugely, mixed messages. Go the an System x conference, you won't hear Domino even mentioned. Sure, they'll discuss sizing for Exchange, but you have to beg for Domino. And that's just an example for starters.

  1. 21  Ian White http://www.ianwhite.net | 12/18/2007 9:33:03 AM

    Greetings from the SS Titanic, I would like to inform all our passengers that on this perfect vessel you will have wonderful view of the icebergs tomorrow. Have a nice day.

    On a more practical front (and speaking as a long time business partner) when you had more (lower yeid) BPs you had better reach, better impact and closer connections with LOB. Where are we now. How may 'real' Lotus BP companies are left?. No touch, no relationship, no purchase. C'est la vie

  1. 22  Ian White http://www.ianwhite.net | 12/18/2007 9:33:10 AM

    Greetings from the SS Titanic, I would like to inform all our passengers that on this perfect vessel you will have wonderful view of the icebergs tomorrow. Have a nice day.

    On a more practical front (and speaking as a long time business partner) when you had more (lower yieid) BPs you had better reach, better impact and closer connections with LOB. Where are we now. How may 'real' Lotus BP companies are left?. No touch, no relationship, no purchase. C'est la vie

  1. 23  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 9:34:02 AM

    @19 - There's a thought: all that installing security patches time and again plus the regular crashes et al keeps them all in employment wheras if it worked without the repeated issues their employer could get by with less and some of them would be out the door. Thus, if it all actually worked without issue it would be a weakness but it's a strength because the issues keep them all employed growing bigger empires and, of course, since they are all working on it together with the same vested interest that'll be their understanding of collaboration.

    How depressing. We need more offense. We need the schoolkids, those who earnestly want to save time and money, and an IBM that steadfastly pushes Domino whenever it can.

  1. 24  Bruce Elgort http://ideajam.net | 12/18/2007 9:45:54 AM

    @22,

    I blogged about "the state of the lotus isv" back in July: { Link }

  1. 25  Keith Brooks http://lotustech.blogspot.com | 12/18/2007 10:03:22 AM

    No weaknesses = they all suck and we are happy to live with what we have. Maybe.

    On the other hand, is it so wrong to believe they really are happy? In an SMB sometimes they really do enjoy the simplicity we all forget from the corp world. Windows 2000 is their server or maybe exchange or sql but not up to date because that's a 2-4 year rollover.

    @14 is correct, Nathan sees it for what it is, not asking the right questions will yield incorrect advice/answers.

    On the bright side I just upgraded 4 Domino servers last night to R8, one of which was up for 215 days straight, their main web server.

  1. 26  Roger Hintz http://www.rogerhintz.com | 12/18/2007 10:06:18 AM

    @16 & @18 - I just had this discussion with my former employer last weekend. We are absolutely amazed at the lack of recognition by the IBM/Lotus channel that Microsoft has been giving software to schools for free so that the kids learn to be MS advocates. We discussed the same issues in the OS/400 arena, where IBM offers a 40% discount on the hardware, but still wants to charge full licensing. In the cash-strapped education environments this is not a strategy that will perpetuate the species (products). Sure the school systems are not enterprise level customers, but they are educating students who are impressionable, and in many cases will someday work for the enterprises. IBM's approach for SMB has traditionally been to go after the big fish and let the business partners handle "the small fry". We, the business partners, can only promote so much. We need a partner. We need help. But mostly, we need some cognizant recognition that a problem does exist with the product perception and that small customers do make a difference in the grand scheme of the market.

  1. 27  Kevin Mort  | 12/18/2007 10:11:10 AM

    @6 - Jim, I'll add something to that. If you aren't the one "in the role" you normally get no play. Essentially they figure that the folks "in the role" are there for a reason, and they know best. Other opinions aren't taken seriously.

  1. 28  Peter de Haas http://www.peterdehaas.net | 12/18/2007 10:13:11 AM

    Funny, 26 comments and counting on a comment to "research" without a link to the source or any other context.

    It's sort of of asking and answering your own questions :-)

  1. 29  Stuart McIntyre http://collaborationmatters.com | 12/18/2007 10:13:28 AM

    Could it just be that a different kind of personality gets drawn toward MS products? One that isn't so willing to criticise or question? One that is more ready to accept the status quo and that things just work as they do (crashes, incompatibilities, restrictions etc.)?

  1. 30  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 12/18/2007 10:22:25 AM

    My response got too long: { Link }

    I'm with the people who see that IBM's lack of action is largely to blame for their lack of recognition and the customer perception that MS is better.

    @28 - It's better than Microsoft being absolutely oblivious that the questions even needs to be asked, but still ignoring it when someone else brings it up: { Link } { Link } . I've been pretty ticked off at the lackluster response to most things on the official MS blogs. At least Ed brings this up and is willing to concede that things need to change. Even he isn't a blind zealot.

  1. 31  Kevin Mort  | 12/18/2007 10:24:04 AM

    Oh and...

    @19 - Exactly Pedro. I think it is funny how many folks in the Lotus community love to slam MS and complain about how they penetrate accounts but then don't even consider running the Domino server on anything but Windows.

    @20/29 - As I believe we all know, IBM's product diversity and the structure of its sales force and their pay plans dictate some of what we see in terms of product focus (or lack thereof). They seem to take the approach that they'll ride the fence and talk about "what customers are buying" - and their perception is that this is Exchange.

    In my estimation Systems couldn't care less about Software Group most days (and vice versa some days), and that's part of the problem. MSFT is brutally loyal to its own products, and I think IBM could benefit from some of that mentality.

  1. 32  Kevin Mort  | 12/18/2007 10:27:15 AM

    Ooops, sorry that was supposed to be @20/26.

  1. 33  Jacques Page  | 12/18/2007 10:27:45 AM

    Once upon a time, we spoke to a larger client using Lotus Domino version old... In private they admitted they had serious issues and would have even more issues after they moved to Microsoft Exchange (which they were in the process of).

    When asked to repeat that to their board of direction, they simply declined and even told that same board that Nothing was wrong and they would be better with Exchange.

    You take what you want from this but I am finding out more and more that for someone to admit they are wrong (never mind the technology used), is a very hard almost impossible task.. Can there be a few of those here?

  1. 34  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 10:29:01 AM

    From the blog @28:

    "... I'm excited to announce the release of SP1 for WSS 3.0 and Office SharePoint Server 2007. Before you install the service pack there are some very important things to understand. In this post I'll try to provide you with the resources you need to be successful in updating to the latest service pack. Please do NOT simply drop to the bottom and find the links and download and install directly on your production environments. It is essential that you understand the appropriate guidance and test out the patch in a separate test environment. "

    Obviously it's nowhere near as straightforward as purging admin4.nsf, backing up names.nsf etc., sticking in a Domino CD or DVD and running setup.exe. No weaknesses in Microsoft products, my ar$e.

  1. 35  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/18/2007 10:53:30 AM

    @28 do you really think I'd post something like this without having the actual research? I've provided more than enough context to authenticate the research and the sample pool.

  1. 36  Ian White http://www.ianwhite.net | 12/18/2007 11:01:05 AM

    @35 Actually Ed I think it is quite brave of you to kick off this discussion -the only issue is no one can fix the problem

  1. 37  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 11:07:25 AM

    @36 - My view too. @28 is obviously flogging another horse.

  1. 38  Jim Casale  | 12/18/2007 11:13:42 AM

    @ Ed, My boss has told many war stories but none that I can remember where he worked in an insurance company :-P

    @27 Not only do I not have "the role" I don't have the butter either ;-)

  1. 39  Bruce Elgort http://ideajam.net | 12/18/2007 11:54:00 AM

    Has anybody read Dilbert this week? Can you say "dead horse"?

  1. 40  Keith Brooks http://lotustech.blogspot.com | 12/18/2007 12:50:55 PM

    traveling and haven't read the comics, that is too funny.

  1. 41  Richard Schwartz http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz | 12/18/2007 1:07:04 PM

    First of all, Ed, did the researcher separate out "No answer" from an actual answer of "None". If not, I would go back to the researcher and get the breakdown. There's a big difference, and there are quite a few possible reasons why people may have given no answer. If it's not broken down, it might be that a substantial number of people simply couldn't think of or decide upon a _main_ weakness amongst the many weaknesses.

    Also, I can't imagine that a researcher who asks "What are the main weaknesses..." wouldn't have also asked the obvious counterpart question "What are the main strengths..." I don't know if you're planning another post about that, but I think that the answers to that for Microsoft are much more important for IBM to pay attention to than any perceived lack of weaknesses.

  1. 42  Ian White http://www.ianwhite.net | 12/18/2007 2:12:51 PM

    Ed Ed Ed

    What do you want your readers to do???

    Who in IBM is really listening (that can make a difference) , will Steve Mills face those of us in the trenches when he visits LS (and about time too)

    I hate working up emotion unless I can use it constructively - we know we have the technology but its like that which was said of the brave British soldier during the first World War - Lions led by donkeys

  1. 43  Kevin Mort  | 12/18/2007 2:14:01 PM

    @33 - Jacques, good observation. In today's climate admitting you made a poor decision or questioning the stated direction is often frowned upon.

    Nothing to see here, please move along. ; )

    @38 - Good one Jim.

    @41 - Richard, the more I look at this the more I agree with you. My guess is that the "none" was really "no answer" in many cases. And as others have mentioned, the usual tendancy of people to want to get off the phone as soon as possible often results in them not fully answering such a question.

    In any event, I think if you read boards on other sites & such it is pretty clear that "none" is not the majority opinion of MSFT products. ; )

  1. 44  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/18/2007 2:20:27 PM

    @41/43. Why is "no answer" so different than "none"? No such gap exists in the answers to other questions asked of this audience. And if they couldn't think of one quickly, isn't that essentially the same as "none"? No such challenge existed, as I mentioned, when the Lotus customers were asked the same question.

    @42, what to do? Great question. I've been studying at the totality of this research trying to figure that out. One thing is for sure -- there are a lot of "latent" issues in the MS customer base, and I've believed that for years. This research affirms it. We need to find ways to break through pre-conceived notions and blind spots when talking to MS-oriented technologists, that's for sure.

  1. 45  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 2:41:02 PM

    My memory may not be serving me quite as well as it used to but I believe, perhaps anecdotally, that a good year before Internet Explorer made it's way from the depths of the Windows 'Accessories' menu to an icon on the desktop, IBM ditched its browser with the words, "IBM don't sell consumer products", coined the term "e-Business", and decided to concentrate on the 70% of the world's data that's held on back end systems. I didn't argue then but sometimes I think I maybe should have or at least posed the question, "Is there not a risk that in doing so IBM will concede some of the ground on which (mass) user perceptions are formed?"

    IBM is a much bigger company than Microsoft but sometimes I wonder if there's a significant perception that the opposite is true. In the UK, 25% of the population believe the sun orbits the earth (and that includes my mother who stated it was obvious and didn't want to discuss it further). Forming and changing perceptions is a long and difficult and at times a delicate haul.

    Education. Education. Education.

  1. 46  Roger Hintz http://www.rogerhintz.com | 12/18/2007 3:03:07 PM

    @44 (Ed) - That's what I was referring to in my @26 post. The latent issues were created by Microsoft being there to hand out software in the elementary schools and up. We now have an entire generation that has worked with MS and think it is the only thing worth having because it is really all they have ever known. I wish I had a nickel for everytime I've asked someone if they've ever heard of Lotus Notes and they replied 'No' or 'isn't that a spreadsheet?'

  1. 47  Dennis  | 12/18/2007 3:21:08 PM

    Should read "perceived reality." Many of my users consider themselves power users because they use MS <product name>. A command line, basic troubleshooting or connectivity issues are beyond them. Many C-level folks lack any technical savy. In their mind, they are there to manage, not understand technology. MS is the the easy way our for them.

  1. 48  Keil Wilson  | 12/18/2007 3:45:55 PM

    Ed, you're in sales, the idea that people believe what they percieve to be true should be nothing new to you. Facts are just part of the information that people use to form their perception. Other tools could include experience, advice, education, and public opinion. In the end, reality is just a component of the decision.

    At one time people used to percieve being fat as being healthy? Today it's quite the opposite (which is really too bad for me). Did being overweight suddenly cause people to start dying sooner? Of course not. While it's generally accepted today that fat is bad for your circulatory system, what if the fast food industry were making a concerted effort, in the face of facts, that being fat was indeed still healthy? How many people would percieve that as true?

    I'm not ragging on the marketing, Ed (it's gotten so much better), but people will believe what they're told. The message needs to be consistent, recurring, loud, and clear. It needs to come from all of IBM. It seems like MS is getting their message across better.

    So, I started to think about how I'd form a perception of Notes and Exchange if I didn't know anything about either of them. What's the first thing that you would do? I did a Google search. I searched for "microsoft exchange," and found page after page of articles, white papers, business partners, and communities that support Exchange. I couldn't find one bad review or negative article. Then I searched for "lotus notes." How depressing. It's all about message.

  1. 49  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/18/2007 3:47:54 PM

    @48, completely agree the search results need substantial improvement.

  1. 50  Richard Schwartz http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz | 12/18/2007 3:49:17 PM

    @44 Ed: depending on the survey methodology, there are any number of reasons why "No Answer" may be different than an answer of "none". A properly designed and administered survey will either exclude "No answer" from all results, or it will differentiate "No answer" from "none". Proper analysis requires taking either of these into account.

    I've already actually demonstrated one reason why it could be relevant, accidentally. I mis-read the question. I thought it said "main weakness" rather than "main weaknesses". If I were a subject in the survey and I thought the question was about "main weakness", I might have not answered because I thought that there are three or four major weaknesses and none of them are the "main" one. That would be very different from recording an answer of "none".

    Or if I heard the question correctly, I may not have answered because I was short on time and I suspected from experience with other surveys (we get a lot of them in NH) that there was going to be a follow-up about each of the five weaknesses that I really thought were worthy of being part of my answer.

    I could probably come up with a half dozen more reasons why it could make a difference for any individual subject of the survey.

  1. 51  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/18/2007 4:04:54 PM

    @50, which would be fine except that the same question asked to the Lotus customer audience of the same size in the same market yielded no "no answer" or "none" results. Could go either way on that.

  1. 52  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 6:03:53 PM

    A true story I often tell is one from my school days when the English teacher wrote a paragraph on the blackboard and asked us to split it into 2 paragraphs.

    It boiled down to a choice between position A or position B. After not many answers as the teacher went round the class it became a braver and braver person that bucked the trend. Only two people got it right in the end and you know, had there not been a teacher there to rule on the matter the 30 that were wrong would have perceived that they were (all) right and might have answered 'none' to an appropriately phrased question about their grammatical weaknesses or even the strength/weakness of a fine teacher. It was one of the top groups too.

    Maybe more Microsoft customers than Lotus customers just don't know. Was "don't know" an option and/or was it not multiple choice?

    I used to think that the Notes client was designed for intelligent people - people that wanted to innovate, explore, experiment and learn to support the thing for themselves - and that Microsoft just dumbed down. That might just have been youthful arrogance but perhaps old criticisms of the Notes client are evidence that the majority of people just want ultra simple and have no time or inkling to learn how to exploit complex programs like Notes.

    I personally want to rant every time that bleedin' Word paperclip tells me it looks like I want write a letter because I find it insulting but maybe all the people that never listened to the English teacher explain how to do it do actually need it and maybe because it's there it improves the quality of written output from businesses, makes people look and get perceived as better than they really are and thus contibutes to a strong perception of Microsoft?

    Let's face it, Outlook is a dedicated email client which therefore has a limited use case compared to Notes so it could well be perceived as easier to use - less weak - on that basis alone. All it takes is one poorly developed but extensively used Notes application to sour perceptions of Notes.

    I have an old Notes application to support which I'm not allowed to rewrite which comes in for perennial criticism but Notes gets criticised along with it even although it's not Notes fault or even that of the person who developed it. Outlook never gets tarred in that way and if it was a poor .Net application instead the end user probably wouldn't even know and so Microsoft wouldn't get dragged in to it and the perception of Microsoft wouldn't get dented whereas the perception of Lotus unfairly does. Honestly, I get support calls stating there's a problem with Notes but upon investigation it's just that aforementioned application. Had the application been written in .Net those calls would identify the application by name at the outset and it - the application - not the technology it was built with or its vendor would suffer from a diminished perception.

    Having said all that 75% of Microsoft cutomers didn't say 'none' or 'no answer' and I'll bet the survey had a lot of positive comments about what appears to be coming down the line (eg SameTime and Connections).

    Don't lose sleep over the 25%. I think it came as news to quite a number of people in the UK in recent weeks that sales of Guinness stout are declining apace. I bet you'd be hard pressed to find someone over here who couldn't remember 5 or more 'classic' Guinness TV ads over the years; the perception of the brand was and probably still is strong and by corollary the perception of brands eating into the Guinness market were weaker yet the reality is apparently different. Nearly everyone likes it but they don't want to drink it as their regular pint. A strong perception of the product and brand isn't likely to help Guinness.

    Notes has had a number of consequetive quarters growth in recent times. Maybe only 20% of Microsoft customers will answer 'none' next year if they perceive the Lotus brand to continue to be getting stronger.

  1. 53  Ian Scott  | 12/18/2007 6:13:25 PM

    That was a bit long - too late at night - but an additional point about the perception of Guinness I meant to include; it is possible that now we know it has a sales problem people might admit to being less fond of it than they have hithertoo been or view the brand as weaker since now they know the truth and are not guessing or making it up or saying what they think as apposed to what they know.

  1. 54  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 12/18/2007 6:40:49 PM

    "I have an old Notes application to support which I'm not allowed to rewrite which comes in for perennial criticism but Notes gets criticised along with it even although it's not Notes fault or even that of the person who developed it."

    Ian, will you be at Lotusphere? If so, email me. I want to talk to you about this.

  1. 55  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/19/2007 7:44:03 AM

    @52 - "Was "don't know" an option and/or was it not multiple choice?"

    This particular question was open-ended -- not multiple choice.

  1. 56  mark  | 12/19/2007 10:16:37 AM

    Hi Ed,

    I just wanted to add a comment or two, I recently attended a premium support seminar in the UK, around 60 odd people, not sure of the actual number of customers, but suffice to say they were premium UK companies.

    The general perception in that room was Notes 8 although very good looking was not viable for these organisation in the short term. The heavy memory footprint has wider infrastructure implications, laptops, desktops, citrix support and servers. internal IBM slides suggested over 200meg per user session, we still run laptops with 250mb RAM.

    Overall 8 has taken a step in the right direction but realistically, to roll it out is a vast undertaking and certainly has hidden costs mainly around infrastructure and is out of reach of the majority of people considering Notes 8 in that room.

    just a few points.

    cheers

  1. 57  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 12/19/2007 11:22:58 AM

    Hence the ongoing support for the "basic" configuration. But at some point we have to continue to evolve the product and take advantage of current hardware footprints. I was just in the market to buy a new laptop ... around US$1200 machines that start with 2 GB of RAM.

  1. 58  Pedro Quaresma  | 12/19/2007 11:36:28 AM

    @57) I think you can get the Dell Vostro 1000 with 2Gb in the US for half of that (hopefully this link will work: { Link } )

  1. 59  Ian Scott  | 12/19/2007 4:00:31 PM

    @55 - Thank you for the clarification.

    Sorry to return to Guinness but our press was full of it a few weeks ago. If, prior to that, I'd been asked to give an open ended assessment of the weakness of the Guinness brand and products I would probably have said 'none'. Strangely enough now that I know they have a problem with long term sales decline (which implies to me that the brand is weak or weakening) I would know the correct answer ought to be 'they must have' or something like that but I might now actually be more inclined to say 'none' out of fear of a follow up question to which I wouldn't and don't know a meaningful answer.

    I'm glad I'm not in marketing and Ed, I hope you're glad you don't work for Guinness.

  1. 60  Ian White http://www.ianwhite.net | 12/19/2007 5:46:37 PM

    @57 We just bought a Vostro 1000 with 2 gb was $600 (ish) and will happily run XP with 2 VM's, I am going to put Ubuntu on it to give it a bit more clout.

    Oh and I am running full 8 in the VM!

    ps all down to the Irish bar in Lotusphere for a Guinness then?

  1. 61  Samuel deHuszar Allen http://www.essentialforms.com | 12/19/2007 9:54:48 PM

    @30 What's funny is that Eric Mack (of the GTD gang) has quite vocally wondered why IBM isn't used more for personal productivity. With IBM's streamlining the Notes client, I think they could EASILY repackage it as an all-in-one productivity tool that is easy to organize (because all your files are kept in a database), secure, and easy to back up.

    All that might be needed to do this is to:

    A) create an Eclipse perspective that strips out (or greys out) all server settings/configurations.

    B) set up a Document Library database specifically for Symphony, so people can write/edit directly to/from an nsf database.

    C) sell this "streamlined productivity app" in best buy with all the rights of a single user Express license

    D) start advertising to small businesses (as in start-ups, not 500-2000 employee small businesses), schools, and non-profits.

    E) start offering incentives for IBM Business Partners to build applets for Personal/5-10 person use like basic timesheet and expense applications.

    F) create or incentivize BPs to create more meaningful educational resources for Notes users. I had an idea I posted on IdeaJam as one possibility. Here's the link: { Link }

    G) give away the development tools

    D is really the big one because they are the businesses that employ the majority of people. The great majority of those companies use Microsoft Office. If their small business is successful and grows, you'd better believe the first thing they do to scale their network is slap an exchange/Sharepoint/.NET server(s) under MS Office because that's all they know, and they want to be able to collaborate with their employees/collegues. "Lotus Notes? Doesn't Aunt so-and-so use that at BigPharma? I didn't know they still made that..."

    I know you're sick of reading that Ed, but that's still how most of my conversations go with the great majority of my clients.

    The issue of IBM/Lotus and marketing has not been as much of an issue of aggressiveness and clarity (though IBM has gotten better in those regards) but WHO IBM was marketing TO, and what the customer thought they were being pitched. Big business have teams of people who handle product acquisition and support. Small-businesses usually just grab at what is easy at hand, and what's familiar to them.

    As Charles pointed out, IBM kinda needs to win these groups in order to start tilting the market/mindshare in their favor, and IBM has been woefully dismissing them.

  1. 62  mark  | 12/20/2007 2:49:45 AM

    Ed @57

    I think the point is being missed a touch, there is no value for my compaby in moving to 8 basic, end users want the nice looking (as much as I hate to say it) outlook type client. Its ok to say that you can walk into a shop and buy a 2gb laptop, but that means we would have to swap out over 2500 just to make notes 8 standard viable. Not to mention trebling our citrix infrastructure.

    I really like 8, huge step in the right direction, but just not viable yet.

    cheers

  1. 63  Gary Grant http://www.conseq.co.uk | 12/20/2007 2:58:47 AM

    This research doesn't surprise me at all. MS spend lots of money on making sure their sharp end products are usable. It's all about the desktop experience.

    Scanning this set of responses, it seems (careful use of words) to me that most of the "but Notes is better than Exchange" comments are about back end fabulousness, easy upgrades and how wonderful Linux is. End users don't care about that stuff at all.

    To focus on the point... how many of the spouses of Notes professionals use Notes for their personal mail, and how many use Outlook? I would guess many use neither, but more use Outlook than Notes at home... not to mention the pain of trying to manage multiple POP accounts... Outlook hammers Notes hands down on that front.

    Primarily though, it's about percieved wisdom (if I had a quid for every time I have actually heard some one seemingly intelligent say "but everyone is using Microsoft"....) and the user experience at the very sharpest end of the IT pyramid. Talking to C level execs about the back end merits of easy server upgrades and the fabulousness of the Linux kernel is often a waste of perfectly good breath.

    Perhaps with Notes8 things may change, but until what I believe to be the prevailing misconception of world domination in the corporate email market is addressed head on, I suspect we will continue to discuss this issue in the bars and back rooms of Lotusphere for many years to come.

  1. 64  Stuart McIntyre http://collaborationmatters.com | 12/20/2007 5:09:04 AM

    @62 But wouldn't the same be true of Vista, Office 2007 or any other significant apps from 2005 onwards.

    Surely your organisation (and many others that are out there) have avoided getting stuck in the situation where your IT infrastructure is so out of date?

    Besides, I would argue that Notes 8 (definitely if also using Sametime and/or Quickr) will give your userbase enough of a productivity lift that justifying the hardware upgrade is a no-brainer. Hardware is always cheap compared to people costs...

  1. 65  Ian White http://www.ianwhite.net | 12/20/2007 6:22:51 AM

    @64 Stuart you have to be kidding - do you really beleive what you have type in your second line - wake up and smell the very stale IT coffee

  1. 66  mark  | 12/20/2007 7:43:51 AM

    @64 Stuart

    Yes to degree, however a full infrastructure refresh to upgrade an email client is not going to happen.

    Incidentally, our hardware is pretty up to date. The real issue is we run a 6.5.1 client which has a footprint of around 65mb, version 8.0 is running at over 200 mb. IBM slides and my own testing verify this.

  1. 67  mark  | 12/20/2007 7:43:54 AM

    @64 Stuart

    Yes to degree, however a full infrastructure refresh to upgrade an email client is not going to happen.

    Incidentally, our hardware is pretty up to date. The real issue is we run a 6.5.1 client which has a footprint of around 65mb, version 8.0 is running at over 200 mb. IBM slides and my own testing verify this.

  1. 68  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 12/20/2007 9:15:37 AM

    "Incidentally, our hardware is pretty up to date."

    With 256MB RAM!? That's clearly not true. 256 was barely high-end in 2001.

  1. 69  mark  | 12/21/2007 4:57:30 AM

    @68 to clarify I was talking about the Citrix infrastructure

  1. 70  Sean  | 12/26/2007 9:02:32 AM

    re: 66) A full infractrure refresh is not going to happen until they want to run Office 2007 right?